M S MOHIDDIN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by one Mohideen, who was a tram movement Inspector in the M. & S. M. Railway and had jurisdiction over all stations between Guntakkal and Bezwada and Macherla, against his conviction, under Section 151, I. P. C., by the Sessions Judge, Guntur, for having received Rs. 30 'mamool,' or bribe, from P. W. 7, the station master, Perecherla, for showing favour to him and not sending reports against him and bringing into trouble, and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment. He had been charged also with the offence of criminal misconduct "in the discharge of his duty by habitually accepting or obtaining or attempting to obtain illegal gratifications like that from P. W. 1 Chelapathi Naidu, while he was station master at Bethamcherla, for showing favour by not sending reports against him, and of bargaining to obtain a bribe of Rs; 200 from P. W. 3 for enabling him to, transport green chillies illegally and actually securing a part payment of Rs. 50 out of that bribe, an offence punishable under Section 5(2) of Central Act II (2) of 1947". The learned Sessions Judge found that the evidence regarding the alleged offence under Section 5(2) of Central Act U (2) of 1947 was false or unreliably and acquitted him of that offence while convicting him of the offence under Section 151, I. P. C., in appeal here.

(2.) I have perused the entire records, and heard Mr. K.S. Jayarama lyer, the learned counsel for the appellant, and the learned Public Prosecutor, 'contra'. The facts are briefly these:

(3.) The appellant, as train movement inspector, had the duty of checking train detentions, movement of luggage, including unauthorised luggage, and delays in loading and unloading of goods, and sending reports against railway officials regarding all these & suspected acts of misconduct. The reports sent by him would be inquired into by the authorities concerned and suitable punishment awarded to station masters etc. The prosecution alleged that, taking advantage of the power given to him by virtue of his post and underlying his power by sending reports against the station masters etc., and showing what he could do, the appellant was asking the station masters to pay bribes, which he called 'mamools', to him every month. He asked P. W. 7 to pay him a bribe or 'mamool' of Rs. 15 a month two or three months after he joined duty as station master at Perecherla in October 1948, in the same way as his predecessor was paying, so that he might cover up all irregularities & derelictions of duty and not send reports against him & bring him to trouble. P. W. 7 said that he was a man with a large family and with onerous liabilities, and could not afford to pay the bribe demanded.